If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

If we eliminate government to the point that their only purpose is to protect the United States (department of defense), maintain relations with the rest of the world (Department of the State), provide for a common currency (Department of the Treasury), provide a fair method of jurisprudence (Department of justice) and since, we seem to always be sending troops into harms way we should help them when they return (Department of Veteran Affairs) then the government wouldn't be forcing anything on the citizenry, including religion, abortion, gay marriage, etc it would be left up to the states or communities. Then our tax money wouldn't be going to the cesspool known as Washington DC and it would be spent locally based on local elections, in which if you have a candidate running on gay marriage and pro-choice your vote would really mean something, because it would be one out 5K, 10K even 100K rather than millions.

You don't like the job the guy/gal you voted in as mayor or dog catcher is doing, you know where he/she lives, your local council meetings would be meaningful to you and the residents of the village, town or city, because, the elected officials would have to answer first hand to the electorate.

Washington DC is too far removed from main street to be effective at anything except the above mentioned departments and even then, I'm not sure how effective they would be, but it would be better than the bloated bureaucracies in Washington today.

If we eliminate government to the point that their only purpose is to protect the United States (department of defense), maintain relations with the rest of the world (Department of the State), provide for a common currency (Department of the Treasury), provide a fair method of jurisprudence (Department of justice) and since, we seem to always be sending troops into harms way we should help them when they return (Department of Veteran Affairs) then the government wouldn't be forcing anything on the citizenry, including religion, abortion, gay marriage, etc it would be left up to the states or communities. Then our tax money wouldn't be going to the cesspool known as Washington DC and it would be spent locally based on local elections, in which if you have a candidate running on gay marriage and pro-choice your vote would really mean something, because it would be one out 5K, 10K even 100K rather than millions.

You don't like the job the guy/gal you voted in as mayor or dog catcher is doing, you know where he/she lives, your local council meetings would be meaningful to you and the residents of the village, town or city, because, the elected officials would have to answer first hand to the electorate.

Washington DC is too far removed from main street to be effective at anything except the above mentioned departments and even then, I'm not sure how effective they would be, but it would be better than the bloated bureaucracies in Washington today.

Pappy

Not only should we cut everything, but we should also consider outsourcing and remaining jobs to private businesses. We should incentivize gov't employees to eliminate their own job.

How would we respond to the guy who says his family's lived in TX for generations, but he's become very concerned that the state is short-changing education for reasons not as worthy (in his opinion), and he wants to the Feds to be able to set and enforce some minimal education standards?

We could tell him, hey, it's the right of the State to set these standards, if you don't like it move!

That sounds a bit harsh, but OK, so he moves. Then when he gets to his new state he finds the education is fine, but the residents there have used the power of that particular state to limit gun laws, a power he thinks is contrary to his rights under the US Constitution. But hey, states rights are states rights, so what does he do, move somewhere else, to some state where they all agree with him on all his issues?

From another point of view - what about air pollution, water rights, and other issues that cross state lines? For example, should Ohio be allowed to spew toxic fumes that roll across PA and then the NE ... can it also spew it's Ohioness into the water that ultimately runs into the Mississippi, polluting everything downstream of them ... all with impugnity as far as federal regulations go? Because hey, what they do in their borders is nobody's business but their own?

All this to say I think there is at least some role for federal regulation. How much is too much, how much is not enough? ... like everything else, the devil is in the details. It's the failure of our representatives to work successfully through problems like that AT ALL that I think is what is failing this country, not the fact that there are regulations in place.

So, I usually start off disagreeing with any absolutist points of view that all things not local are not good. We are the firgin' United States of America, not the European Union.

Congrat to Obama/Biden for winning the game. The Electoral College has essentially created a strategy game for the uber rich. If you don't have $2B (or to be fairer, influence of $2B) you are a slave to the system. We are nothing but a bunch of slaves/pawns in their game.

The game's quite brilliant if you look at it objectively. These uber rich guys have to pretend to care about you and me - a lie which is so hurtful in a sense that our only reasonable response is to put our head in the sand and pretend it isn't so. At the same time, they must paint a contrived truth about others in a way that we can openly believe it. The painting becomes their own self portrait masterpiece. That makes no sense and perfect sense simultaneously.

I've always been a little jealous of people that can lie to your face and con you into liking them in the same breath. I also feel bad because these guys are pawns in the system as well.

I guess it really can't be avoided. Every action a gov't takes essentially removes a personal freedom. It's a paradox of sorts. Every single vote, bill, idea, etc. that comes from the gov't enslaves us to the system and pulls us deeper into dependency that we'll never escape.

This stuff really has almost 0 impact on you or me. We can overcome any obstacle in our lifetimes. But the tiny little waves the gov't makes today will impact future generations in 50-100 years from now. We can be selfish and find happiness and a path that makes sense that keeps us content. We can live above this. But everything will come back to bite the future.

It's sad. Who cares? It matters. It doesn't. I can't make sense of something that's the most important thing in the world yet there's no rational reason to feel anything other than apathy.

The crux of the problem is that any action taken to fix the problems almost always leads to more complications. I'm starting to understand why all empires fall/fail eventually.

The only thing that makes sense is that things eventually just become too complex and you've gotta stop re-arranging the chairs on the Titanic. And you just have to start over fresh.